{"id":4073,"date":"2016-05-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2016-05-12T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www-prod.greenpeace.org\/usa\/campaign-updates\/4073\/overfishing-denier\/"},"modified":"2024-11-19T21:55:14","modified_gmt":"2024-11-19T21:55:14","slug":"overfishing-denier","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/usa\/overfishing-denier\/","title":{"rendered":"Ray Hilborn: Overfishing Denier"},"content":{"rendered":"

A Greenpeace investigation shows that a prominent American fisheries scientist took millions of dollars in funding from fishing industry groups without publicly disclosing it.<\/span><\/p>\n

Ray Hilborn
Dr. Ray Hilborn has made a career refuting the scientific consensus that points to declining fisheries worldwide. Now, documents recently obtained through the Freedom of Information Act show that Dr. Hilborn has received more than $3 million from commercial fishing and seafood interests. Photo via Wikimedia Commons. <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Update, February 2019:<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Back in 2016, Greenpeace\u00a0called out a well-known scientist named Ray Hilborn for failing to disclose the funding he’d received from the fishing industry in several of his publications. Conflict of interest doesn’t necessarily mean that it affects your conclusions, but studies have shown that it often does \u2014 and that is why disclosure is important. (For similar reasons, Greenpeace does not accept funding from governments or corporations. We value our independence, which ensures our ability to say what needs to be said.) Some fisheries biologists were outraged that we had the gall to point out these conflicts, claiming that we were just doing it because we didn’t agree with what he was saying. Meanwhile, quite a few other scientists quietly said they really appreciated our effort. Finally, the journal PLOS ONE wrote to say they’d posted <\/em>a\u00a0correction<\/a>, noting his industry funding. As part of their investigation into our appeal, the journal also posted a\u00a0correction<\/a>\u00a0noting that several authors of a paper defending the Marine Stewardship Council were actually employed by the MSC – and Ray Hilborn had received funding from certifiers employed by the MSC. Small victories, perhaps, but in an era where we need strong scientific advice more than ever, we cannot afford to have research clouded by undisclosed conflicts of interest.\u00a0<\/strong>While PLOS ONE is to be commended for investigating this matter and posting corrections accordingly, other journals have yet to follow suit.<\/em><\/p>\n

Warming and acidifying waters. Massive bleaching of corals. Collapsing fisheries. Pollution from oil, chemicals, plastics, and human waste. The oceans and ocean life are in trouble, and most scientists in the field agree. To begin to turn it around, civilization needs to look at the state of the oceans with sober and clear eyes. <\/span><\/p>\n

Now, a Greenpeace investigation shows that a prominent scientist \u2014 one who has presented a rosier picture of the oceans than most of his peers \u2014 has accepted millions in research funding and additional consultancy payments from fishing industry groups without disclosing it to the public or the venues that publish his work.<\/span><\/p>\n

Dr. Ray Hilborn, a professor at University of Washington\u2019s School of Aquatic and Fisheries Sciences, has made a career of contradicting the science that shows increasingly declining fish stocks across the globe. His maverick position has earned him a unique status within ocean science. <\/span><\/p>\n

And, unsurprisingly, it has won him many fans within industry. Dr. Hilborn\u2019s work has often been promoted when the industrial fishing industry has sought to defend its worst practices, including bottom trawling. And as someone often cited in industry-funded public relations efforts, he has become the go-to scientist for contrarian opinions on fishing impacts.<\/span><\/p>\n

Dr. Hilborn\u2019s extensive catalog of publications has propelled him to wide recognition. They also seem to have insulated him from criticism. The results of Greenpeace\u2019s recent <\/span>Public Records Act requests<\/span><\/a> to Hilborn\u2019s employer the University of Washington will undoubtedly force the science community to reassess the latitude they have shown the professor for years. Records show that Dr. Hilborn has taken more than $3.5 million in corporate funding for research. He has also received an untold sum from a long career as a consultant to industry. <\/span><\/p>\n

And while some of his peers suspected, few if any of them knew for sure.<\/span><\/p>\n

While inquiries into Dr. Hilborn\u2019s conduct are still ongoing, a number of ethical concerns have been brought to light. Dr. Hilborn\u2019s failure to disclose funding sources violates the policies of many of the journals in which he has published \u2014 the journals that have effectively made his career. Failure to disclose that funding is also a violation of the ethical standards of academic science, as it creates an inaccurate perception among scientific peers and the public that Dr. Hilborn\u2019s research has no potential financial bias.<\/span><\/p>\n

Documents show that between 2003 and 2015, Dr. Hilborn received $3.56 million from 69 distinct fishing or seafood companies and corporate interests, including <\/span>Trident<\/span><\/a>, the South African Deep Sea Trawling Association, and the <\/span>International Seafood Sustainability Foundation<\/span><\/a>, which, despite its name, is the trade association for the industrial tuna fleet. Documents also show that in the same period, Dr. Hilborn received payments as a consultant from a number of industry groups, including <\/span>FishAmerica Foundation<\/span><\/a>, the <\/span>New Zealand Seafood Industry Council<\/span><\/a>, <\/span>At-Sea Processors Association<\/span><\/a>, the <\/span>BC Underwater Harvesters Association<\/span><\/a>, and <\/span>ExxonMobil<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

Dive deeper into the documents detailing Dr. Hilborn’s connections to the fishing industry:<\/h2>\n
<\/div>\n